Dec 18, 2013
Practicum Screenshots
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Israel
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from Israel
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Israel
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Japan
seen from Australia
seen from Kazakhstan
seen from Singapore
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Israel
seen from Netherlands
seen from Malaysia
Practicum Screenshots
Practicum Screenshots
Response to "We Live In Public"
I found the societies of Quiet and Weliveinpublic.com to be the most interesting aspects of the film. I found both to be startlingly accurate (and terrifying) representations of what life in society is becoming. Neither were perfect examples of what society would become, and the both proved points about internet culture in general ways, but both were grasping at the idea of a world in which people want to willingly share their information for some form of social capital. I thought the quote “We want to give people their 15 minutes of fame every day” by Harris was very apt quote about today’s internet and social media culture, and it’s pretty amazing that it was made 5+ years before any of it even started drifting that way.
I don’t think that our society lives in public to the extent that Quiet and Weliveinpublic.com did, but I can see us gravitating closer and closer towards that unrestricted access. What made those two experiments different from society’s current state was their complete and total publication of their subjects’ intimate moments, and I don’t think society has reached that point yet. The amount of your intimate knowledge on the web is still entirely up to you. You can’t do anything about the CCTV’s or outside surveillance, but those aren’t really breaches of privacy; you’re in public, having a camera around shouldn’t change the way you act, you were already being viewed by the people around you. You are in entire control, however, of what you post on social media and what you search for. The amount of personal and intimate information that you disseminate is still entirely up to you. It seems more likely to me that society will drift closer to the worlds of Quiet not by governmental or institutional breaches of privacy, but rather from our own comfort of being “watched”. People (myself included) are getting more and more comfortable with sharing themselves online, and as this happens, I think the previously established barriers of personal information will slowly start to come down. It’s actually pretty similar to what happened in Quiet, but instead of the subjects getting more comfortable and anarchistic around the select group of people they’re with, I think we’ll get more comfortable with sharing things with society as a whole.
We Live In Public blog
One thing that really struck me was when Harris talked about lions and tigers being the kings of the animal kingdom and how they ended up in zoos, and that's where we were going to end up too. I do not disagree with the statement but I feel as if Harris himself is aiding in to make that happen. With turning the project on himself, especially just because he thought that this was the way life was becoming inevitably, Harris in a sense created the zoo himself.
Another interesting point was when he was addressing his art exhibit and discussing that everything was free for the participants, except the video shot of them, which they took ownership of. It brings up a good question of at what cost does a person essentially give up their freedom and identity? I think our society has fallen into this trap, of in a sense living such public lives, even though a majority of us are not being paid too much attention to. Everyone wants their fifteen minutes of fame, but I think the fame most people desire is drastically different from what they receive.
Before watching this movie I had a very free interpretation on privacy, basically I had no concern as to what anyone saw, even illegally, as long as I wasn't persecuted. But the film changed my perspective. I still have a notion that if we as a society were not so private that there could be a possibility of greater social freedom, but to recklessly abandon your privacy and identity is foolish, because in a sense it is all you have.
Response to 'We Are Legion'
It seems to me that Anonymous’ mission evolved as Anonymous itself evolved. Their first response was galvanized largely by Scientology’s assault on one of their own members; it was a selfish act of revenge. Throughout the course of that fight, and more notably in their defense of WikiLeaks, I think they finally earned the moniker of being a “hactivist” group. It wasn’t just about them anymore, once they learned of their collective power their conscience and perceived responsibilities expanded. It’s pretty obvious that the early Anonymous didn’t think much of itself, they viewed their community as one predicated around worthless pranks and trolling. They didn’t take themselves seriously, so of course they didn’t take internet activism seriously. I think the example related early in the video of the “shy, muscular kid who didn’t realize his own strength until after he punched someone in the face” is very appropriate.
Two of the moments I found really interesting in the film were Anonymous’ origins and their defense of WikiLeaks. Before the video, I knew of Anonymous only through their mass media persona as the intimidating hacker/activist group with the creepy videos. I also knew, separately, of 4chan. I had never actually visited the site; most of my exposure to their content came through screenshots posted to Reddit or Facebook. I probably should have had a bigger sample size before I rushed to a judgment, but I always regarded 4chan as wholly immature, kind of mean, and above all, just random (not that there’s anything wrong with that). To think that one grew out of the other is just mind-boggling to me. Anonymous has always seemed so intimidating, so focused on their goal. It’s hard for me to fathom that the same group that created the ‘Almost Politically Correct Redneck’ meme even has world affairs on their radar, and more than that are actually affecting change. The fact that they have the collective power and influence online to affect such change on themselves and the world is pretty remarkable. To think that they would then change themselves again to become the “defenders of the internet” is even more remarkable.
I think things like this prove the legitimacy of Web 2.0 as something other than a money-making ploy for the computer industry. It’s not an “industry term” if its affordances eventually come back and bite that same industry. The fluidity, democracy, and community afforded by Web 2.0 are the only reason things like Anonymous, Wikileaks, or the SOPA blackouts could happen.
We Are Legion Blog
After watching We Are Legion, it definitely shined new light on perspectives of New Media and relating to society. The movie highlights the Hacktivist movement and the group Anonymous, which is a collective of hackers that cooperatively work to promote their views of truth and opinion, especially pertaining to the Internet.
The first moment of the film that struck me was during the middle of the film, when the movie was directed towards the evolution of Anonymous through 4Chan. I found it interesting with the 'God Complex' I thought was prevalent throughout the members who were interviewed. With the origins of 4Chan hackers and hackers in general, being rooted in humor, the hackers discuss about how they were attacking those who took issues too seriously and how the victims needed to reevaluate their ideals. I find this ironic in a sense for a group who is fighting for free speech for all - why do the people of Anonymous get to choose what is appropriately offensive and what is not?
In contrast with the previously statement, the other point I found interesting was the final dialogue in the movie by the young female hacker. She stated that she did not care of what belief system a person rooted from, if their opinions differed from hers, or what they wanted with life, but that they had a right to their opinion, that everyone does. Although the roots of the Hacktivist community were biased in a sense, through the progression of the film and time, they have evolved to really become what they set out to be - a totem for free speech and expression for everyone and to oppress censorship.
Final Paper Topic
My final paper will discuss apples unique business plan. Apples vertical integration put it at the front of the smartphone industry however I will explore how apples smartphone is slowly slipping to the past, by examining competitors strategies and demographics. Focusing on the apple company and its direct product competitors and how they have managed to keep consumers buying. This section will answer how the company has been able to continue consumer purchase. How competing industries like Google vs Apple spur the need to produce more choices in interfaces. After exploring these points I will look toward the future to see where these new interfaces plan to go in the future, how have these interfaces changed the way we do our daily activities.
- Melissa Brown
Reminded me of today's lecture on Music Trends and MTV